On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Paul Tanner <email@example.com> wrote:
<< snip >>
> Of course the total debt as measured in dollars could always go up > with a growing GDP while the the total debt measured as a percentage > of a growing GDP could always go down. >
I think "always" is a faulty word to use with respect to such time-sensitive institutions as humans create.
You're promoting the stereotype that mathematics is disconnected from reality (doesn't have to be that aloof).
>> I don't know why you say that. Those deficits of so many hundreds of >> billions per year are uncovered expenses that have to be covered >> through borrowing. > > Borrowing is not counted as revenue. Otherwise spending and revenue > are always equal, the term "debt" no longer has the same meaning. >
Fine to quibble. Borrowing is how we defray expenses, keep our creditors at bay. Everyone with a Visa card knows what borrowing means.
Right, it's not revenue, so I should have said: taxpayers do not cover expenses, and revenue from them actually falls way short, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars a year, of covering expenses. Uncle Sam is broke because on paper he's unable to pay as he goes and has no realistic plans for doing so. His credit rating is not as good as many would like it to be, but for the moment there's a willingness to continue the farce, unless something better that comes along.
>> The sun is the ultimate source of energy for Planet Earth >> > > I'm talking about money. >
Yes, I know, another STEM-deficient economics teacher, talking about money. Lets talk about physics more.
> But you are not getting it. The type of businesses that government has > an ownership stake in in these countries are not so much the retail > oriented businesses, but the big corporations of the "public > infrastructure" types: The financial industry, oil and gas and coal, > power generation (especially nuclear - look at France with its > entirely socialized nuclear industry), shipping, armaments, and so on. >
Right, but my idea is even better as government needs to be people friendly and not just own a lot of big stuff behind the scenes.
I have Swedish heritage. Maybe the Chinese should be learning from me.
The National Parks are a good example.
How about some new / elite schools while we're at it? I have some blueprints.
But other sponsors are welcome, which may be a sticking point for some coders / legislators.
The USA has revolving door lobbying and interlocking directorates with former Congressmen etc. Lots of ways to exert government control and vice versa.
In my view, the Scandinavians are so successful in large degree because they don't go overboard with military spending.
They're more into a lean / mean intelligence community, like other smart countries do. I hope Chinese keep learning from this example too, and not the USA's "big 'n dumb" antics.
The USA's example of late is mostly an object lesson in how *not* to mess up. Bombing the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade by mistake, or hitting that veterinary pharmacy in Sudan -- these weren't even Bush excesses.